• Hi Guest, want to participate in the discussions, keep track of read/unread posts and more? Create your free account and increase the benefits of your eGriz.com experience today!

The Real Problem - "Dear Colleague Letter" US Dept Ed

Status
Not open for further replies.
crackgina said:
tnt said:
There is little difference between "perponderance of evidence" and "most likley scenario" the dear colleague letter is addressing prevention as much as anything, and making sure the "environment" is non discriminatory. Its how it is in the real world, might just as well get used to it. Sexual harrasement in ANY measure can (and often will) lead to immediate dismissal. It could be as simple as a social date between a supervisor and subordinate or even a "dirty joke"
Click to expand...

Big difference between losing a job and be denied an education moron. Additionally, the decision will brand the losing party for life. I don't know why anyone would discount the importance of this PC bullshit.
Click to expand...

Apparently they don't teach you much about sexual harassment down at the car wash. The "real world" consequences are for more severe than "losing a job" Expulsion is very rare, but certainly a possibility. As far as being denied an education maybe for a common guy, but for good ball player, there will always be a Bobby Hauck out there willing to give them a second chance.
 
You are a moron with no understanding of Constitutional protections. If you were falsely accused, I bet you would rethink your position. We left Britain largely over unfair and punitive practices. Go geeet yur lernin cap on Festus and come back and post some then.
 
crackgina said:
You are a moron with no understanding of Constitutional protections. If you were falsely accused, I bet you would rethink your position. We left Britain largely over unfair and punitive practices. Go geeet yur lernin cap on Festus and come back and post some then.
Click to expand...

Aside from trial by egriz who has been falsley accused, expelled, and life ruined (or for that matter tried for a "crime"
 
Silvertip said:
grizcountry420 said:
Silvertip said:
Can there be any credibility in anybody who uses the lame quasi-pejorative word "Dude?" :roll:
...unless the poster is a dudette.
Click to expand...

Dude... You have no idea what your talking about brah.... :cool:
Click to expand...

brah?... Equally :lame: . Finish that GED and start growing yourself a vocabulary...
Click to expand...

All ready have my degree brah.. Thanks for looking out dude.. :thumb:
 
tnt said:
crackgina said:
You are a moron with no understanding of Constitutional protections. If you were falsely accused, I bet you would rethink your position. We left Britain largely over unfair and punitive practices. Go geeet yur lernin cap on Festus and come back and post some then.
Click to expand...

Aside from trial by egriz who has been falsley accused, expelled, and life ruined (or for that matter tried for a "crime"
Click to expand...

Are you capable of thinking theoretically or is that just too much to ask? A severe penalty (expulsion) based upon a "preponderance of the evidence" standard is too susceptible to mistake in my opinion. Clear and convincing evidence should be required before someone is expelled. That is what the conduct code specified at the time of JJ's alleged event. The honor court used the new standard to convict JJ of a transgression ex post facto. That is unconstitutional. I hope I didn't hurt your head with the big words.
 
You mean JJ is expelled again ???????....... I'm surprised that that having been in the "hearing" to make such a bold statement that you are sharing information few others are privy to.....

And as far as the "preponderance of evidence standard" I'd love to see it go away. 80 % of the attorneys in this country would go with it as they would no longer be able to practice "litigation" or personal injury cases, that would be a great day for America and the Constitution indeed.
 
tnt said:
You mean JJ is expelled again ???????....... I'm surprised that that having been in the "hearing" to make such a bold statement that you are sharing information few others are privy to.....
Click to expand...

Good God man, are you actually implying that we don't know a lot of this discussion is predicated on the outcome of future proceedings? It isn't like JJ being expelled is a fabrication of eGriz posters (my apologies to Mr Rachac if he posts here). The vast majority of the disgrunted (count me as among them) as really just concerned by extrapolating likely scenarios. Certainly there has been a whole lot of talk outside this forum that could raise many concerns. This thread is just more of the same. If you can't handle that then by all means, step away from the keyboard and go golfing or whatever.
 
Grisly Fan said:
tnt said:
You mean JJ is expelled again ???????....... I'm surprised that that having been in the "hearing" to make such a bold statement that you are sharing information few others are privy to.....
Click to expand...

Good God man, are you actually implying that we don't know a lot of this discussion is predicated on the outcome of future proceedings? It isn't like JJ being expelled is a fabrication of eGriz posters (my apologies to Mr Rachac if he posts here). The vast majority of the disgrunted (count me as among them) as really just concerned by extrapolating likely scenarios. Certainly there has been a whole lot of talk outside this forum that could raise many concerns. This thread is just more of the same. If you can't handle that then by all means, step away from the keyboard and go golfing or whatever.
Click to expand...

I understand that ..... But by the same token, The dear colleague letter going a step further in defining what Sexual harrasement is a fun thing, especially when the lawyers an wanna be lawyers start waving the constitution, but are more than willing to take their contingency fees based on the same standard they are condeming. I'll talk about THAT all day long

It ceases to be fun (for me ) when one of the Kids is involved in the games. I have no clue what JJ and his girlfriend did or didn't do, even less what the hearing involved or decided. I have no problem with "fun" at my expense and especially at someone elses. Rachac should never get work as a journalist again. Just about every reporter in this area Held waiting for confirmation (and said so) His irresponsibility has caused hurt to everyone of the kids involved (and on both sides of the hearing) continued discussion about the kids continues it.

My personal opinion is that there is no BETTER place for the JJ thing to be handled than the Honor court. The kids involved obviously had a relationship before the incident, handled it poorly when it "ended" Its hard to for me to believe based on what I know that the criminal system needs involved. The standards set up in the "letter" allow thinks to be handeled in a way that "you (both of you) made some really dumb decisions" and there are consequences as reult. and maybe BOTH can learn. Problem is we have too damn many lawyers (and wanna be lawyers) with interests beyond the kids.

This thing (most of it) has never been about the kids and WE shouldn't be involving them. Its about the adults/leadership at the university who have put program, public relations, W/L, image, and themselves (and agendas) ahead of the kids. Those folks need gone no mateerr how mjor (or minor) there roles have been, the program cleaned up (and beyond the athletic department), and the University moving forward.
 
TNT, you seem to not understand or appreciate that there's a huge difference between the Constitution/Bill of Rights, than lawsuits involving monetary damages. I'm amazed at the number of posters on this board who don't understand or appreciate fundamental American rights, like those in the Constitution and Bill of Rights.

I think the university court, or whatever it's called, is a horrible place to decide such an important matter, especially based on preponderance of the evidence. The composition of the court is picked by the university, and neither the accused nor his attorney has any role in picking those on the court, or disqualifying any on the court. This does not have the rights like jury selection. 4 of the members are students, selected by the AUSM. Isn't AUSM the body that has voted against raising student fees for athletics? See below quote from the code.

"The University Court, appointed by the President of the University, consists of three undergraduate students and one graduate student nominated by ASUM, two faculty members nominated by the Executive Committee of the Faculty Senate, and one staff member nominated by Staff Senate. One of the faculty appointees is elected by the members of the Court to serve as Chair."

I have no idea what JJ or his attorney would do, but this situation has lawsuit written all over it. I'd love to see a good plaintiffs attorney presenting this one to a Montana jury.
 
I understand the difference PR Its the burden or level of proof in criminal vs. civil court. The problem is now we have raised the level of proof to the point where kids are being hurt.... (Now granted maybe I shouldn't be classing traditional U students in that group but I am.)

By raising that standard instead of our Schools being able to deal with problems they can't. Anyone who has raised kids knows there are times when they are guilty as heck, but you can't prove it. As a parent you deal with it anyway. High school administrators used to be able to deal with it. Now more often than not A kid caught fighting is ticketed by the school resource officer proper name for the police officer assigne to a school) and dealt with by youth court, because of those rights. Now even our middle schools and grade schools are in the same boat. We had a kindergarten foster kid who was ticketed for stealing (milk from the lunch room) because it was not a "status offense"

At our university, discretion is gone but some administrators haven't figured it out (till now) Everything is now a "crime" or its not Much of the administrators and coaches ability to deal with stuff is gone with it. By trying we have the NCAA, DOJ, and DEO climbing down our throats. Because quite the opposite of what you think PR, The burden of proof has made it a big deal. If anything the "letter" has allowed some discretion BACK if the system is used consistently. The changes in the code (both the athletic and honor) in accordance with the letter TO ME seem to return some discretion back to the school.....
 
tnt said:
I understand the difference PR Its the burden or level of proof in criminal vs. civil court. The problem is now we have raised the level of proof to the point where kids are being hurt.... (Now granted maybe I shouldn't be classing traditional U students in that group but I am.)

By raising that standard instead of our Schools being able to deal with problems they can't. Anyone who has raised kids knows there are times when they are guilty as heck, but you can't prove it. As a parent you deal with it anyway. High school administrators used to be able to deal with it. Now more often than not A kid caught fighting is ticketed by the school resource officer proper name for the police officer assigne to a school) and dealt with by youth court, because of those rights. Now even our middle schools and grade schools are in the same boat. We had a kindergarten foster kid who was ticketed for stealing (milk from the lunch room) because it was not a "status offense"

At our university, discretion is gone but some administrators haven't figured it out (till now) Everything is now a "crime" or its not Much of the administrators and coaches ability to deal with stuff is gone with it. By trying we have the NCAA, DOJ, and DEO climbing down our throats. Because quite the opposite of what you think PR, The burden of proof has made it a big deal. If anything the "letter" has allowed some discretion BACK if the system is used consistently. The changes in the code (both the athletic and honor) in accordance with the letter TO ME seem to return some discretion back to the school.....
Click to expand...

The standard of proof has not been raised; it's been lowered. Clear and convincing has been the standard for colleges in this area for many years. It has never been preponderance. It is still clear and convincing for things other than sexual harrassment/assault.

To the extent that a lower standard provides some discretion, it erodes fundamental rights and really our liberty, I believe. Discretion goes both ways. It allows a university panel to expel a kid in a she-said, he-said, with no evidence of sexual assault other than what the accuser is claiming. This means that every time college students have sex, the guy is subject to being expelled from school because someone decides to accuse him of sexual assault, whether it is true or not or in the gray area. It also subjects the accused to university-chosen panel of students and faculty, who just may or may not like his group (i.e. football), his demeanor, or him. Very very dangerous.

In our country, there is a saying in the criminal system that it's better to allow a few guilty people to get off, than to convict one person wrongfully. I believe in that.
 
i've heard another legal saying: when the FEDs are investigating, you better strike a plea before they actually file charges because they won't back peddle.
 
Sadly we no longer live by the Constitution in this country. Every day, our laws are changing based on lawyer, judges, advocates, etc interpretations of the the Constitution. The Bill of Rights are slowly going out the window, as personal freedoms and liberties are being taken away.

How many of our laws are not in the Constitution or Bill of Rights? I'll just start with one....the IRS....yep I see them in the Constitution. Exactly what the forefathers of this country fought against is now prevalent in our lives every day. Saw yesterday that NYC wants to prevent the sale of soft drinks over 16 oz to fight obesity. Even wearing your own seat belt is the beginning of the loss of our rights.

You think you vote for the best candidate? Ha, you vote for who the biggest money puts in front of you...our candidates in all parties are jokes now.

Yep, it would be nice if we still lived by the Constitution and Bill of Rights, but we dont....and a judge will decide it or worse yet a lawsuit. America land of the free...and the right to sue!

There will be another Revolution within the next 100 years or so!
 
I think that there is another, more subtle, but potentially devastating, change going on here. In the past the practice has apparently been to let any criminal charges proceed, or be evaluated, before proceeding with charges under the student conduct code. The change, as I understand it, is that charges under the student conduct code are to proceed---- without regard to whether there may be criminal proceedings.

Harmless change?? Not at all. This puts the accused in a very awkward position if there is a hearing under the student conduct code, since any testimony that he would offer in the student proceeding could be parsed and held against him in a subsequent criminal proceeding. It kind of makes a joke out of his right to remain silent and make the state prove its case in a criminal proceeding.

The practical effect of this change is that any good attorney would advise his client to remain silent in the student proceeding if there was any chance that his testimony could be used in a later criminal proceeding. I have no knowledge but its possible that this is exactly what transpired in the student proceeding with Jordy Johnson, and that his attorney advised him not to testify in the student proceeding so of course he would be found guilty particularly by the lower standard of a "preponderance of the evidence."
 
ordigger said:
Sadly we no longer live by the Constitution in this country. Every day, our laws are changing based on lawyer, judges, advocates, etc interpretations of the the Constitution.
Click to expand...

So the Constitution is being interpreted "every day" in the courts, but we are no longer living by it? I don't get it.
 
ordigger said:
Sadly we no longer live by the Constitution in this country. Every day, our laws are changing based on lawyer, judges, advocates, etc interpretations of the the Constitution. The Bill of Rights are slowly going out the window, as personal freedoms and liberties are being taken away.

How many of our laws are not in the Constitution or Bill of Rights? I'll just start with one....the IRS....yep I see them in the Constitution. Exactly what the forefathers of this country fought against is now prevalent in our lives every day. Saw yesterday that NYC wants to prevent the sale of soft drinks over 16 oz to fight obesity. Even wearing your own seat belt is the beginning of the loss of our rights.

You think you vote for the best candidate? Ha, you vote for who the biggest money puts in front of you...our candidates in all parties are jokes now.

Yep, it would be nice if we still lived by the Constitution and Bill of Rights, but we dont....and a judge will decide it or worse yet a lawsuit. America land of the free...and the right to sue!

There will be another Revolution within the next 100 years or so!
Click to expand...

Your boy Barrack is the leader in creating a nanny state in America. You bought into the hope and change thing hook-line-and-sinker. Now what?
 
ordigger said:
How many of our laws are not in the Constitution or Bill of Rights? I'll just start with one....the IRS....yep I see them in the Constitution.
Click to expand...

Sarcasm noted. However, you did make a correct statement. Article I, Section 8, Clause 1.
 
Growler1 said:
ordigger said:
Sadly we no longer live by the Constitution in this country. Every day, our laws are changing based on lawyer, judges, advocates, etc interpretations of the the Constitution. The Bill of Rights are slowly going out the window, as personal freedoms and liberties are being taken away.

How many of our laws are not in the Constitution or Bill of Rights? I'll just start with one....the IRS....yep I see them in the Constitution. Exactly what the forefathers of this country fought against is now prevalent in our lives every day. Saw yesterday that NYC wants to prevent the sale of soft drinks over 16 oz to fight obesity. Even wearing your own seat belt is the beginning of the loss of our rights.

You think you vote for the best candidate? Ha, you vote for who the biggest money puts in front of you...our candidates in all parties are jokes now.

Yep, it would be nice if we still lived by the Constitution and Bill of Rights, but we dont....and a judge will decide it or worse yet a lawsuit. America land of the free...and the right to sue!

There will be another Revolution within the next 100 years or so!
Click to expand...

Your boy Barrack is the leader in creating a nanny state in America. You bought into the hope and change thing hook-line-and-sinker. Now what?
Click to expand...

Funny....I havent voted for a Democratic Presidential candidate in over 20 years. The Liberals and the Conservatives are the same....both push their agendas, neither wants change nor works for it. And the Tea Party aint the answer either. Just another group pushing their agenda. The great presidents have been those who can reach across the aisle, and say "We are all Americans"
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Latest posts

Back
Top